In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
ionic: use dev_consume_skb_any outside of napi
If we're not in a NAPI softirq context, we need to be careful
about how we call napi_consume_skb(), specifically we need to
call it with budget==0 to signal to it that we're not in a
safe context.
This was found while running some configuration stress testing
of traffic and a change queue config loop running, and this
curious note popped out:
[ 4371.402645] BUG: using smp_processor_id() in preemptible [00000000] code: ethtool/20545
[ 4371.402897] caller is napi_skb_cache_put+0x16/0x80
[ 4371.403120] CPU: 25 PID: 20545 Comm: ethtool Kdump: loaded Tainted: G OE 6.10.0-rc3-netnext+ #8
[ 4371.403302] Hardware name: HPE ProLiant DL360 Gen10/ProLiant DL360 Gen10, BIOS U32 01/23/2021
[ 4371.403460] Call Trace:
[ 4371.403613]
[ 4371.403758] dump_stack_lvl+0x4f/0x70
[ 4371.403904] check_preemption_disabled+0xc1/0xe0
[ 4371.404051] napi_skb_cache_put+0x16/0x80
[ 4371.404199] ionic_tx_clean+0x18a/0x240 [ionic]
[ 4371.404354] ionic_tx_cq_service+0xc4/0x200 [ionic]
[ 4371.404505] ionic_tx_flush+0x15/0x70 [ionic]
[ 4371.404653] ? ionic_lif_qcq_deinit.isra.23+0x5b/0x70 [ionic]
[ 4371.404805] ionic_txrx_deinit+0x71/0x190 [ionic]
[ 4371.404956] ionic_reconfigure_queues+0x5f5/0xff0 [ionic]
[ 4371.405111] ionic_set_ringparam+0x2e8/0x3e0 [ionic]
[ 4371.405265] ethnl_set_rings+0x1f1/0x300
[ 4371.405418] ethnl_default_set_doit+0xbb/0x160
[ 4371.405571] genl_family_rcv_msg_doit+0xff/0x130
[...]
I found that ionic_tx_clean() calls napi_consume_skb() which calls
napi_skb_cache_put(), but before that last call is the note
/* Zero budget indicate non-NAPI context called us, like netpoll */
and
DEBUG_NET_WARN_ON_ONCE(!in_softirq());
Those are pretty big hints that we're doing it wrong. We can pass a
context hint down through the calls to let ionic_tx_clean() know what
we're doing so it can call napi_consume_skb() correctly.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (5.5): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 5.5 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 5.5 MEDIUMCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
- EG Likelihood
- 0.2% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-25). FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
- Confirmed exploitation
- None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
- EG Priority
- SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at every mission impact level.CISA BOD 26-04: 60 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.Each input and its source, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at every mission impact level.
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table
BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)60 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.
The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it